Who plays Grunfeld and why is it awesome?

Looking at your semi-slav  games on this site, Robbie, which may not be typical for your more serious games, you don't really play the active/theoretical semi-slav lines. Your games are more old-fashioned Queens gambit were have played c6 early, at least ones were white plays Bg5. I used to think these were rather passive and unpromising, because black should really be looking to play c5. The recent quality chess book "Playing 1.d4 d5" shows they are ok though. Your e3 games weren't really the theoretical meran lines either. 

yes because I have no knowledge of theory.  All I am trying to do is play the Colle with reversed colours.  I literally know nothing other than I can take away from the centre once white posts the Kings Bishop and play ...b5 and ...c5, that's the zenith of my theory.  Other than that I know absolutely nothing which you have ascertained already.

The problem with learning Grunfeld is that everyone has their own particular way of playing it.  Of course that could be said of any opening but Grunfeld is more susceptible I think.  I was watching a video and IM Andrew Martin was extolling the virtues of a line invented by Larsen. 7...Qd7

"The problem with learning Grunfeld is that everyone has their own particular way of playing it."

If there ever was a Grandelius variation of the Grunfeld, I would play it every time.

My problem with the Grunfeld is that I have spent a lot of time persuading my wife to stop playing it.

Once she complied (since she could not afford studying new trends every second day) and returned to her familiar Benoni, she started scoring much, much better.

Do you know how it was the final of the 2011 Spanish absolute championship (Illescas vs Alexandrova in the last round)? What would have you done?  :P

It happened  six years ago, in the last round of the 1st Anogia Chess Open at Crete. I was playing in "vacation mode" and had two wins in the first two rounds, and after that 4 draws in a row, and she had ups and downs, with 4 wins, 2 losses, and no draws.

Long story short, we played our game until there was no chance left for either side, and agreed a draw. This lasted 8 whole moves, if I can recall well...

you guys 2 funny, thanks for the good times

What else?  :P

This is an extract from the original article by Federico Marín about the matter. Translation (accurate or not) courtesy of your friendly neighbourhood Pulpofeira. The last line is pure gold:

In the 19th Century, chess players were looking for beautiful sacrifices and spectacular combinations, they would take any risk to achieve the checkmate. Anderssen, Morphy and other dreamers gave us immortal masterpieces and defined what it was called romantic chess.

A few days ago, championship of Spain in Menorca gave us a new meaning. Olga Alexandrova, ex champion of Ucrania and Spanish since two years ago, reached last round with chances of becoming the first female winner of the absolute title. After beating several grandmasters, the last obstacle was called Miguel Illescas. It wasn’t so important that the Barcelonian had won eight times the championship yet. Neither it was the fact he is her trainer. The worst thing was that he is her husband.

Finally, Olga and Miguel agreed a quick draw for three-fold repetition. Not only they didn’t anything illegal, although for the public the lack of fight could result frustrating, but they were congratulated for their sportmanship. The draw allowed a third part, Alvar Alonso, 19 years-old, to claim the prize. As it has been written, chess lost, but love won.

“To win you need bitchiness, you must want it -explains Illescas-. It would have been violent” Alexandrova corroborates that she didn’t either have any desire of fighting and she didn’t even thought about it, although it would have been a success with the only antecedent of Judith Polgar in Hungary. The most puzzling thing is that both of them, away from competitive chess, were participating to train for the European championship for national teams.

(…)

During the national championship, Miguel and Olga spent lot of time together and the former even was helping his wife to prepare, but they had separate rooms. “We have very different schedules”, explains Olga. “I was getting up earlier and Miguel kept sleeping, because he goes to bed much later. Besides, I sometimes talk while sleeping. I can even hit”. This also explains the draw…

amazing.  Its very difficult, if they had played to the death and she had won they might have accused him of throwing the game, if he had played and given his wife a spanking it might have suffered in other ways. In the end, practicalities won.

I agree. My wife, however, told me: "I would have slaughtered you and take the prize to home to spend it in our kids. It's a win-win".

and this was a bullet game? very interesting analysis. thanks so much for it.

lol i just understood that, hilarious. You slaughtered, the kids in new clothes and licking ice creams and Mrs Pulp glowing from head to foot. 2 funny

You nailed it!

Here is a game between yours truly and anti Grunfeld aficionado Pulpofeira.  In the end I felt like I was getting crushed and was really glad when Pulpofeira acquiesced to a draw.  On analysis with chess engine it seems that white had a slight advantage in the opening, black a slight advantage in the middle game and white regained a slight advantage in the end.  Perhaps some of the stronger players could suggest a way for either white or black to play for a win in the endgame?  My own opinion is that if black is unable to create any kind of counter play on the queenside whites strong central presence will crush him.  It was relatively unpleasant.

We are no match for the World Cup, or maybe they are in such an awe that they don't know what to say!

lol yes IM pfren would love to play a game of such accuracy and brilliancy, he should study our game and learn of its deep strategy!

I bet I could find better plans in Santorini...